• SoftTeeth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Playing games is different than manipulating money out of minors.

    You know that too

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        You could just sell the game at a flat cost. You know, like they use to and still do. If you want a “Live Service” game, just sell a DLC/Expansion Pack every few months.

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            No. That would be taking money from the parents when they purchase the game. The kids would only be playing the game and so long as there’s no store front in the game, there’s no problem.

            Would you ban kids from riding bicycles because stores sell them?

          • Elevator7009@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Most people consider lootbox/gacha predatory and regular advertising a necessary evil. Regular advertising is often manipulative too, but most people consider lootbox/gacha to be more so, especially because of the addictive gambling mechanics it uses that regular advertising doesn’t. Also, most people are used to advertising, and putting lootboxes/gacha in video games is something I am assuming most Lemmy posters can remember there being a controversy over before microtransactions became The New Normal.